On the Use of the Term "Creationism" in Popular Debate in the Past Century or So

[Faizal_Ali]

@gbrooks9

So, if you want to participate in this discussion, come up with the phrasing you prefer… and maybe I will use it… maybe even Eddie will use it.

Behe describes something that is 100% natural and lawful in his God’s Billiards Shot analogy.

The problem with Behe’s argument is elaborated on here:

Michael Behe's "Billiard Shot" model

Intelligent design proponents are careful to say that they cannot identify the designer at work in the world, although most readily concede that God is the most likely possibility. And they offer varied opinions on when and how often a designer intervened. Dr. Behe, for example, said he could imagine that, like an elaborate billiards shot, the design was set up when the Big Bang occurred 13.6 billion years ago. “It could have all been programmed into the universe as far as I’m concerned,” he said. I am skeptical that this can actually be incorporated into Behe’s typical arguments for Intelligent Design Creationism. To be specific: He argues that we can determine specific biological systems or structures that indicate “intelligent design” by the fact that, in his view, they could not have arisen thru undirected evolutionary processes. So, for instance, chloroquine resistance in the malaria parasite falls within what he calls “the edge of evolution” and does not require “design.…

You’ve even commented in that thread, so I don’t know why you are acting like you aren’t aware of these problems.